Warriors are stepping on their throats tonight.Tickets tonight down do $45. Spurs fans do not believe in miracles.
Warriors are stepping on their throats tonight.Tickets tonight down do $45. Spurs fans do not believe in miracles.
Its a good bet. They are going to destroy the Cavs imho. The matchups aren't favorable for Cleveland.I bet some guy at work the whopping total of $10 (that's big money in the journalism world) that GS will beat Cleveland in the Finals. Nobody say I'm not rooting for GS.
I'm glad you edited that!Its a good bet. They are going to destroy the Cavs imho. The matchups aren't favorable for Cleveland.
Edit: And Cleveland still has to win two more games against a tough competitor before that bet can even be possible.
He can do whatever he wants but it will be pretty laughable if the media tries to portray it as a star player finally getting over the hump.it's really soft Durant went to GS. wants a ring blah blah but what a soft decision.
Even money?I bet some guy at work the whopping total of $10 (that's big money in the journalism world) that GS will beat Cleveland in the Finals. Nobody say I'm not rooting for GS.
Lol. So what should a hard man have done, in your estimation?it's really soft Durant went to GS. wants a ring blah blah but what a soft decision.
I still think the timing of the league is making this seem worse than it is. We were all annoyed with LeBron's move to Miami because there wasn't a real challenger. The old Big 3 Celtics team fought hard but they were outgunned. The Bulls clearly were never talented enough. And there wasn't anyone else. If LeBron's move had been 3 years earlier, you'd have 2 elite teams duking it out and it would have been great.Personally I don't have a problem with Durant going to GS. We make such a big deal for our stars winning championships that we shouldn't be surprised when someone goes to the situation that will best bring them a championship.
As a fan, it sucks. Durant's decision to go to GS made the league less fun for everyone except GS fans. In a perfect world the best 8 or so players would have an unspoken agreement that they would all forge their own teams and avoid playing with other all-NBA players, but that isn't going to happen. We are too obsessed with winning to do that.
The old saying, "Don't hate the player, hate the game" applies here. I don't hate Durant for his decision, nor do I hate GS for making smart moves. But the product and the overall system is horrible, and as a result, these unwatchable playoffs are what the league deserves.
The league tried to phase in the salary cap increase gradually but the players union wouldn't accept it. This particular superteam was the result of serendipity, not poor decision making. Still, get rid of the max contract and superteams would be impossible unless multiple players took Brady-esque hometown discounts.The old saying, "Don't hate the player, hate the game" applies here. I don't hate Durant for his decision, nor do I hate GS for making smart moves. But the product and the overall system is horrible, and as a result, these unwatchable playoffs are what the league deserves.
I think so too, but I said the same thing last year, and we all know how that worked out. But this year's Warriors are playing much better in the playoffs than last year's team was going into the Finals, although they haven't played anyone as good as last year's Thunder team either.Its a good bet. They are going to destroy the Cavs imho. The matchups aren't favorable for Cleveland.
Building these Warriors required a lot of luck. First, they had to draft three all-stars without any top-5 picks. Then, they had to sign a top-5 player to an extreme below-market contract -- they don't have the cap space to sign Durant if Curry isn't on that crazy 4/44 deal. Then, they had to get lucky that that Durant became available in the only season during this team's run when they would have had the cap space to sign him, due to the contracts they already had/could offload and the sudden rise in the cap (although to their credit the team saw it coming about 18-24 months out and was actively planning to go after Durant for years). Then, they had to convince Durant to actually come.The league tried to phase in the salary cap increase gradually but the players union wouldn't accept it. This particular superteam was the result of serendipity, not poor decision making. Still, get rid of the max contract and superteams would be impossible unless multiple players took Brady-esque hometown discounts.
Stay in OKC, or go to another team to fight the bully.Lol. So what should a hard man have done, in your estimation?
1996; he signed a pair of one-year $30+ million deals (present value of $70M/season).I don't think that was even an option for pre-championship Jordan (which is probably why we can't see it). When was Jordan first an unrestricted free agent?
Durant gave the first *nine years* of his career to Seattle/OKC. By his ninth year, Jordan had already won three straight titles and the Pistons were crap, so that's not a particularly good analogy. (Edit: plus, as Devizier notes, he wasn't a UFA until 1996). Also Chicago is not to Detroit what OKC is to the Bay Area.Stay in OKC, or go to another team to fight the bully. KD is entitled to do what he wants. He chose bro-dom and funzies. He's probably happier for it, so good for him. I'm trying to picture Michael Jordan leaving the bulls to join the pistons and I'm not seeing it.
As others have noted here, the biggest issues from a structural standpoint are (1) the max salary, which forces guys like Durant and LeBron who should be making $50-60M based on their impact on wins to make roughly the same max salary as guys like Melo and DeMar DeRozan; and (2) the huge, "unsmoothed" jump in salary cap in 2015-16 that gave pretty much every team in the league, including the great ones, a full max salary slot. I can definitely see being pissed off at those things.The old saying, "Don't hate the player, hate the game" applies here. I don't hate Durant for his decision, nor do I hate GS for making smart moves. But the product and the overall system is horrible, and as a result, these unwatchable playoffs are what the league deserves.
Do we really care if he admits it or not? We all know he chose the path of least resistance. I think the part that confuses me is that his OKC team was right there to win a title. They took a 73 win team to the absolute brink and could have won it. Given another shot, they very well could have done it this year. I think his Westbrook relationship had to have played a role. There have long been rumors of tension there. I'm wondering if Westbrook's ball dominant style simply wore on Durant. Golden State's offense is far more equitable and, quite frankly, more fun to watch and certainly participate in.Durant went to GS because he wanted to win and they give him the best chance to win. What pisses me off about it is that we all know this, yet Durant refuses to admit that GS gives him a better chance to win than OKC. All the other stuff might be ancillary reasons, but if GS was a 35 win team but they had great chemistry and a cool system, Durant wouldn't have gone there. I don't understand why he doesn't just admit that.
I mean, none of us actually know the details of his decision process, so it's sort of silly to conjecture about it. Heck, even KD himself may not be fully aware of all the factors and exactly how they broke down. It's reasonable to assume that, as BSF says, he "took the path of least resistance" — but that's obvious, since we mammals are hard-wired to opt for pleasure over pain, given the choice. But I think it's presumptuous and simplistic to assume "best chance to win" is his only or overriding source of pleasure.Durant went to GS because he wanted to win and they give him the best chance to win. What pisses me off about it is that we all know this, yet Durant refuses to admit that GS gives him a better chance to win than OKC. All the other stuff might be ancillary reasons, but if GS was a 35 win team but they had great chemistry and a cool system, Durant wouldn't have gone there. I don't understand why he doesn't just admit that.
The other team you describe is basically the Celtics (going into this year) and Durant spurned them for Warriors. I live in SF, and it is awesome (albeit ungodly expensive).I mean, none of us actually know the details of his decision process, so it's sort of silly to conjecture about it. Heck, even KD himself may not be fully aware of all the factors and exactly how they broke down. It's reasonable to assume that, as BSF says, he "took the path of least resistance" — but that's obvious, since we mammals are hard-wired to opt for pleasure over pain, given the choice. But I think it's presumptuous and simplistic to assume "best chance to win" is his only or overriding source of pleasure.
For what (little) it's worth, I could definitely imagine a scenario where he'd opt to sign with a marginally less likely champion that had a cooler vibe, a more philosophical coach who preaches stuff like "compassion" and "the beautiful game," more selfless and fun teammates, in a much richer, more diverse and more interesting place to live (with the promise of deep-pocketed Silicon Valley connections to boot). For all we know, the 73-win thing was just gravy, or even a negative. But again ... conjecture.
Very good points.He came damn close to picking Boston, apparently — though when a drooling Bill Simmons recently asked him "how close" he said something like "I'll just let you use your imagination."
But again: we don't know that championship odds per se were the deciding factor in picking GS over Boston. KD was tight with Andre, Steph, Dre and Klay from their Team USA stints; no one on Boston is in that clique (which also meant the guys on the Cs probably didn't have his cellphone #). Brad Stevens shares a lot of the philosophy and style of Kerr, but doesn't have quite the aura of NBA Legend of Kerr, a Popovich/Jackson-disciple and former MJ teammate. Etc.
Also: KD loves Oakland and says it reminds him of "Chocolate City" (DC/Baltimore) where he grew up, while Boston, fairly or not, still carries the racial stigmas and scars (occasionally reopened) of the Yawkeys, segregation and slow desegregation, etc.
From a pure hoops and competitive balance standpoint, though ... man, KD to Boston would have been perfect (though it likely would have made Simmons and Boston sports fans even more insufferable than they are). The Cs built around a healthy KD, Bradley and IT could give the Cavs and KD-less Warriors serious problems.
Would have been interesting for a couple of years, but KD / Al / Jaylen / Fultz / Porter / etc. would have dominated the NBA for a good long while.From a pure hoops and competitive balance standpoint, though ... man, KD to Boston would have been perfect (though it likely would have made Simmons and Boston sports fans even more insufferable than they are). The Cs built around a healthy KD, Bradley and IT could give the Cavs and KD-less Warriors serious problems.
Horford was signed before the Durant stuff went down.Would Boston still have signed Horford if they had gotten Durant?
Even without the Warriors, the formula for winning championships in the modern NBA is to get two or three max contract superstars. The max contract means that stars don't choose teams based on money, but on non-monetary factors such as lifestyle, good weather, low taxes, good coach, and chance to win a championship.Building these Warriors required a lot of luck. First, they had to draft three all-stars without any top-5 picks. Then, they had to sign a top-5 player to an extreme below-market contract -- they don't have the cap space to sign Durant if Curry isn't on that crazy 4/44 deal. Then, they had to get lucky that that Durant became available in the only season during this team's run when they would have had the cap space to sign him, due to the contracts they already had/could offload and the sudden rise in the cap (although to their credit the team saw it coming about 18-24 months out and was actively planning to go after Durant for years). Then, they had to convince Durant to actually come.
That's why I don't think changing the rules to prevent the next Warriors super-team makes sense, it's a total one-off. The Curry contract aspect in particular is almost impossible to replicate -- there isn't going to be another MVP for a long time with an $11 million cap hit.
How much better do you think Cleveland is than GS is this year? Because GS is significantly better than they were during last year's finals. Cleveland narrowly beat GS last year and it took Draymond getting suspended for a key closeout game at home, Curry's balky ankle plus GS having to really tax themselves to get past OKC. This year they added a top 3 player, Curry is playing his best ball of the season and they went fo' fo' fo' to the finals.
Utah was 51-31 with a 4.00 SRS; Boston was 53-29 with a 2.25 SRS.Honestly, I think they're about the same. The west and the east were both inflated garbage all year and the playoffs proved it out. So I put about as much stock as the warriors going undefeated as the cavs breezing through the trash East. Hell, I'd even say the Celtics are by far better than any team the warriors have played in the playoffs
The point isn't that the Warriors have gone undefeated because they are super good, it's that when they play Cleveland this year they will be a lot more rested than they were last year when they had to go through an absolute war with OKC.Honestly, I think they're about the same. The west and the east were both inflated garbage all year and the playoffs proved it out. So I put about as much stock as the warriors going undefeated as the cavs breezing through the trash East. Hell, I'd even say the Celtics are by far better than any team the warriors have played in the playoffs
Plus Bogut blowing out his knee in Game 5 (when he game was close) and missing the rest of the series; and 2015 Finals MVP Iguodala throwing out his back in Game 6. That forced Kerr to give actual minutes in Games 6-7 to gimpy Ezeli and (ugh) Anderson Varejao.How much better do you think Cleveland is than GS is this year? Because GS is significantly better than they were during last year's finals. Cleveland narrowly beat GS last year and it took Draymond getting suspended for a key closeout game at home, Curry's balky ankle plus GS having to really tax themselves to get past OKC.
Not to mention GS really went hard through the end of their season last year to break the regular season win loss record. They didn't go into the playoffs refreshed and it showed against OKC and Cleveland. They missed their shots, especially against Cleveland, probably due to fatigue. This year, they are ridiculously rested and fresh. It's a different team.The point isn't that the Warriors have gone undefeated because they are super good, it's that when they play Cleveland this year they will be a lot more rested than they were last year when they had to go through an absolute war with OKC.
The Spurs were primed to make that a real series it was a shame. I can't imagine the Warriors coasting past Cleveland and can certainly see them getting beat.....the Cav's aren't going to fall asleep for half of games like they did against the Celtics. I'm really excited for this series.The love for the warriors here is unreal. I just want to see them tested. That's it. The NBA sucks, id just like a competitive series. They were about to get it last round but the claw was taken out.
Oh, I agree — Spurs with Kawhi and Parker would have definitely made the WCF a battle royale. But then, I think the Spurs with Kawhi and Parker are a significantly better team than Cleveland (somewhat contingent on Pop learning to go small more with Kawhi at the 4 and Simmons/Green at the 3, but I think he would have done that more against the smallish Cavs).The love for the warriors here is unreal. I just want to see them tested. That's it. The NBA sucks, id just like a competitive series. They were about to get it last round but the claw was taken out.
Man, Golden State fans went from long-suffering to insufferable in like 3 years.
It's a common thing. Was chatting with a Cubs friend who is incredibly upset about their not great start -- whatever happened to "just once dear god?" Sox fans can answer that (in an undoubtedly obnoxious way). But, in re the Bay area, I don't find Bay Area fans to be obnoxious in general -- 9ers fans have always been great, Raiders fans are...well....Raiders fans and both have had championshiops. Giants had a great fan base back in my day in the Bay Area, and the few who show up for the Athletics are cool, too. Bay Area baseball fans are a tough crew given the weather.Haha, people have said the same about SF Giants fans, Red Sox fans, Pats fans, etc.
I work in NYC, and I remember having a conversation with a colleague a several years back where I told him that I grew up in the Boston area but moved to the Bay Area at 17 so by the mid-80s my teams had somehow ended up the Sox, Pats, Cal Bears and Warriors. His response: "Jesus, Boston and the Bay Area — the two most annoying fanbases in the world!" ;-P
The eyerolls I get at water coolers and sports bars these days when I fess up to being a Pats/Warriors fan are hilarious. Needless to say, it was not always thus...